• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Default position

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I would presume that since God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and so on, God could Himself use ways to communicate with us that only each individual him or herself understands, and indeed this actually does happen. Of course there are Messengers, or Prophets, of God that figure out ways to explain divinity to certain people in certain ways, but nobody, and I mean nobody, understands God completely in the same ways as anybody else. The way everybody understands God, from a group of atheists, to the most fervent fundamentalist Christian religious denominations, is going to be unique to each individual, no matter what label or description of God they use to describe themselves. This is because God is reality, and that perception of reality is different from each brain and from each unique individual experience each person has. Likewise, I call my idea of God being reality panentheism, but even those who agree with me, and also believe in panentheism, might disagree on core concepts of divinity and other theological beliefs.

God doesn't just have the ability to communicate with anyone, in my panentheist beliefs, God already does this by natural means of evolution and the core five senses we have: hearing, sight, taste, touch and smell. And with our ability to think and perceive things with language, each and every person has the ability to interpret this reality as they sense it themselves. This is why God is so contested from so many people: different experiences from different people with different thoughts and different backgrounds are obviously going to have different results when it comes to understanding God. Understanding God means you understand reality, something no person been able to fully been illustrated to this point yet. There have been movies which God is character, explaining Himself to someone using the vernacular they understand, typically setting things to happen a certain way to correct them, like with An Interview With God or with the popular show God Friended Me.

The truth is, however, reality itself already does all the things that character does on all of those shows, we don't need some all-knowing, all-powerful person to guide us in any of it, because we already know innately what we're here to do and why we're doing it. Wikipedia has a long article dedicated to the reason why people exist, but it's obvious to me that people exist to have the time to do things they want to experience while they're alive, and as long as they aren't harming anyone else, or themselves in fact, there should be no barrier between the reality that is and the reality they wish to see one day. And that to me is how I understand God.
How'd you get to be so smart at such a young age? Many people study religions for years and years until they are twice your age, and still haven't figured what you have. That includes Baha'is some of whom think they know so much. I think the problem is that thye are so entrenched in scriptures that they cannot understand basic human psychology and the differences between humans, so if I say I cannot believe God s loving for example, thye seem perplexed! Just reead what Bahaulalh wrote, many respond. Maybe if they had my life they would understand why I cannot believe that God is loving. There are days when I don't know how much longer I can go on like this but the only answer I will ever get from a Baha'i is "read the Writings."
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Idk the why he would want to, but why wouldn't he want to?
I surmise He wouldn't want to use another method because the method He has used has worked from time immemorial.
Sure, humans screw things up after the message is delivered but that cannot be fully prevented since humans are fallible.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
When did I ever say that God punishes anyone? All God expects is that people make an effort, but if they are not capable God knows that.
I don't know if anyone will be punished. The only punishment is our own punishment, that being we will not get the reward we could have had.

“He who shall accept and believe, shall receive his reward; and he who shall turn away, shall receive none other than his own punishment.”
Gleanings, p. 339
Accept what though, given there are so many choices? One could accept there being a God and simply not accept any particular religious belief - which is no doubt what so many do - because such choosing seems more a personal preference - if one has not already been indoctrinated into one religion or another.
 
Last edited:

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
I would never expect anyone to do belief without facts (evidence) to back up the belief. You can bet your bottom dollar on that.
Except you continually do expect them to.

It is not required of a rational person, it is only your requirement.
I explained about extraordinary claims and why they need extraordinary evidence. These are not my ideas.

It is and has always been your choice since you have free will to choose, but thumbing your nose at God because God you think God is playing 'silly games' is not going to get you anything.
I don't believe for a minute that a god (at least a just and fair one who is at all interested in interacting with humanity) exists. The whole idea seems utterly incompatible with the world we live in. Hence I am not thumbing my nose at any god but I would be if I thought that the one you describe existed and I wouldn't care about 'not getting anything' - I wouldn't trust it anyway.

God is not hiding amongst those false claims.
If it exists, it most certainly is. An omnipotent could make its message stand out regardless of anything humans did.

God did give us the evidence, and the capacity to recognize it, as anything else would be unfair.
Yet you cannot provide anything worthy of the word 'evidence'.

I never said that God requires that much effort on our parts, as that would be unjust and unfair.
Look. The world is full of religious claims. None of them stand out at all, just a confused mess of contradictory fantastical claims. Wading through all of them, on the off chance that one of them might be true is a lot of effort. Said effort just isn't worth it because if a god is hiding like that, I don't want to have anything to do with it anyway.

When I say the evidence is verifiable I mean that the history of the Baha'i Faith
So zero evidence for god, then.

It is easy-peasy to exclude such a God on a purely logical basis. If a God that communicated directly with everybody existed then everyone would have been communicated to by that God. Everyone would claim that God had communicated to them and there would be no atheists. The fact that this has never happened means that if God exists, God would never communicate directly to everyone.
You started off the list with "What a logical person would expect to see if God existed". You can't exclude items from such an expectation on the basis that they haven't happened. That is begging the question again. It is perfectly logical to expect a just and fair god, that wants to communicate with humanity to make itself known to everybody. That it hasn't happened is good reason to think such a god does not exist.

Everyone needs to investigate the message of Baha'u'llah for themselves.
No they don't.

God cannot become a man and speak and write like a man because God is not a man. If God became man God would no longer be God.
God cannot be any less than all-powerful because God is by definition all-powerful.
You're contradicting yourself. You deny that your god is all-powerful by limiting what it can do. An omnipotent god could obviously speak and write like a human without becoming a human. Jeez, we're pretty much at the point where a machine can speak and write like a human.

I never assumed that God exists. I believe that God exists, but only after doing my research. I used logic applied to the evidence to get there.
Except all your so called logic seems to have the existence of a god as a premiss. It's like you can't even imagine the non-existence of god so it just drops out of your 'logic' completely.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Accept what though, given there are so many choices? One could accept there being a God and simply not accept any particular religious belief - which is no doubt what so many do - because such seems more a personal preference - if one has not already been indoctrinated into one religion or another.

:Winner:
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
It would have to be proven to me that God does not exist like the gaps in knowledge would have to be eradicated I think.

Do you also require to have it proven to you that an undetectable dragon doesn't follow you around everywhere you go?
Do you believe such a dragon exists until proven otherwise?

More generally: is there ANYTHING aside from a god that you believe for no other reason then it not having been proven wrong?

I submit you don't. I submit you hold a double standard here.
There's literally an infinity of potential claims you don't believe even though they haven't been proven wrong.

So why do you make an exception for the god claim? What is it about the god claim that isn't present in the dragon claim?

Perhaps, after some years of searching, I will become an athesist if I find no experiences which reinforce my faith. But I've already have had experiences which reinforce my faith, so I just have to see if living a religious life will lead to more of those.

So my default position is one of magical thinking. Does that make sense?

Magical thinking is fallacious.
So yes, that makes sense.

The only way to defend belief in things that have no evidence, is through fallacious reasoning.
 

Altfish

Veteran Member
It seems to me that an atheist's default position is, in fact, atheism.
Isn't that the same for all beliefs or knowledge?
You don't believe in something until you are satisfied with the evidence for its existence.
So be it gods, Australia (I live in the UK and have never been there), yetis, fairies, round earth, etc., we need evidence of its existence.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Isn't that the same for all beliefs or knowledge?
You don't believe in something until you are satisfied with the evidence for its existence.
So be it gods, Australia (I live in the UK and have never been there), yetis, fairies, round earth, etc., we need evidence of its existence.

Yes, but that is not all your live. In practice it tells us nothing if you are an atheist, because it tells nothing about the rest of you as human. In fact, you couldn't live a life doing only "! am an atheist" and nothing else. You would be dead due to the lack of water within 4 days.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Just reead what Bahaulalh wrote, many respond. Maybe if they had my life they would understand why I cannot believe that God is loving.
One does not need to read what Bahaollah wrote. The Abrahamic God made it clear to Moses in the (I suppose) second conversation - Exodus 20.4-6 in just 3 lines. Bahaollah wrote many books and 17,000 (what the Bahais call) tablets. Many more are still have not been translated. Abrahamic God was sparing with his words and not as profligate as Bahaollah.

"You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments."

But your second sentence falsifies the Abrahamic God. Why is your God causing you to suffer even when you believe in him?
 
Last edited:

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
That is not evidence of anything. That is your subjective thinking.
No. It's hard evidence.

Show me where God is anywhere during the development of a child.

Thats just your imagination at work pretending there is a god as you ignore the actual reality involved.
 

Altfish

Veteran Member
Yes, but that is not all your live. In practice it tells us nothing if you are an atheist, because it tells nothing about the rest of you as human. In fact, you couldn't live a life doing only "! am an atheist" and nothing else. You would be dead due to the lack of water within 4 days.
Not sure I understand what you are saying?
Does anyone think that being an atheist says anything other than "I don't believe in gods", if they do they are wrong.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
No. It's hard evidence.

Show me where God is anywhere during the development of a child.

Thats just your imagination at work pretending there is a god as you ignore the actual reality involved.

You are playing philosophy for the Truth. But that has never been done for any human including you and I.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Not sure I understand what you are saying?
Does anyone think that being an atheist says anything other than "I don't believe in gods", if they do they are wrong.

Well, we sure spent a lot of time debating how atheism is better than non atheism. I have never seen evidence for either.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Accept what though, given there are so many choices? One could accept there being a God and simply not accept any particular religious belief - which is no doubt what so many do - because such seems more a personal preference - if one has not already been indoctrinated into one religion or another.
Or if someone wants to trap another in the same mess that one is in. "To see the Emperor's new clothes, you have to get your nose cut. There is no other way."
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
So zero evidence for god, then.
An omnipotent god could obviously speak and write like a human without becoming a human. Jeez, we're pretty much at the point where a machine can speak and write like a human.
Picking up on what Trailblazer writes.
Zero evidence for God and zero evidence for his claimed prophets/sons/messengers/manifestations/mahdis.
Why can an omni-potent God cannot turn himself into a human? How can you limit an omni-potent God? He can do whatever he wants. He has no constraints of form or time. Hindu Gods and Goddesses do it at their will.
Trailblazer's God is a limited God. He cannot speak to people directly, cannot take a human form. Furthermore, he is a poor engineer. Creates imperfect things and when he realizes that, destroys them. He is incapable of perfection.
 
Last edited:
Top